Cynthia Nixon says she's gay by 'choice.' Is it really a choice?
 

By Karen Kaplan, Los Angeles Times/For the Booster Shots blog

1:47 p.m. CST, January 25, 2012

Former “Sex and the City” star Cynthia Nixon says she is gay by “choice” – a statement that has riled many gay rights activitists who insist that people don’t choose their sexual orientation.

Here’s what Nixon, who recently shaved her head to play a cancer patient in a Broadway production of “Wit,” told the New York Times Magazine:

“I gave a speech recently, an empowerment speech to a gay audience, and it included the line ‘I’ve been straight and I’ve been gay, and gay is better.’ And they tried to get me to change it, because they said it implies that homosexuality can be a choice. And for me, it is a choice. I understand that for many people it’s not, but for me it’s a choice, and you don’t get to define my gayness for me.”

The question of whether sexual orientation is subject to nature or nurture – or some combination of both – has been hotly debated for years. If it is not an immutable characteristic, that would imply that a gay person could be somehow transformed into a straight one. In other words, homosexuality could be “cured.” Which in turn implies that being gay is some sort of illness.

Hence, the offense taken to this point of view.

Nixon seemed to anticipate the controversy her remarks might generate. She also told the New York Times:

“A certain section of our community is very concerned that it not be seen as a choice, because if it’s a choice, then we could opt out. I say it doesn’t matter if we flew here or we swam here, it matters that we are here and we are one group and let us stop trying to make a litmus test for who is considered gay and who is not.” Her face was red and her arms were waving. “As you can tell,” she said, “I am very annoyed about this issue. Why can’t it be a choice? Why is that any less legitimate? It seems we’re just ceding this point to bigots who are demanding it, and I don’t think that they should define the terms of the debate. I also feel like people think I was walking around in a cloud and didn’t realize I was gay, which I find really offensive. I find it offensive to me, but I also find it offensive to all the men I’ve been out with.”

As expected, this did not go over smoothly with everyone. Writing on AmericaBlog Gay, John Aravosis wrote that Nixon “needs to learn how to choose her words better, because she just fell into a right-wing trap, willingly. When the religious right says it's a choice, they mean you quite literally choose your sexual orientation, you can change it at will, and that's bull.”

So, what’s the scientific evidence that sexual orientation is either a biologically determined trait or an actual choice?

A Spanish study published in 2009 in the journal Investigacion Clinica summarizes the evidence for genetic influences. Based on research comparing identical twins, fraternal twins and even siblings who were adopted, scientists have determined that 27% to 76% of the chance that one is gay is determined by DNA. The genetic influence appears to be greater for men than for women, according to the study.

Other stuff is probably happening in utero that influences one’s sexual orientation. As a review article published last year in the journal Endocrinology explains, exposure to atypical levels of testosterone and other steroids in the womb is probably responsible for some people being gay. Another review article, published last year in Frontiers in Neuroendocrinology, makes the same point:

“The evidence supports a role for prenatal testosterone exposure in the development of sex-typed interests in childhood, as well as in sexual orientation in later life, at least for some individuals. It appears, however, that other factors, in addition to hormones, play an important role in determining sexual orientation. These factors have not been well-characterized, but possibilities include direct genetic effects, and effects of maternal factors during pregnancy.”

One of those prenatal influences may be the number of males who have previously inhabited the mother’s uterus. It may sound strange, but Canadian researchers have found that “having one or more older brothers boosts the likelihood of a boy growing up to be gay,” as I explained in a 2006 Los Angeles Times story. As I wrote at the time, “The so-called fraternal birth order effect is small: Each older brother increases the chances by 33%. Assuming the base rate of homosexuality among men is 2%, it would take 11 older brothers to give the next son about a 50-50 chance of being gay.” Those findings were reported in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

In addition, my colleague Shari Roan wrote about a fascinating controversy surrounding treatment for a rare condition called congenital adrenal hyperplasia. The disorder can cause girls to be born with genitals that look male, making it hard to tell the baby’s gender. One treatment is to give women hormones during subsequent pregnancies to reduce the risk for siblings. But doctors have found that this approach has an unusual side effect:

“The treatment might reduce the likelihood that a female with the condition will be homosexual,” Roan wrote. “Further, it seems to increase the chances that she will have what are considered more feminine behavioral traits.”

This is all just the tip of the iceberg. But the scientific consensus seems to be that there is indeed a biological basis for homosexuality – though it’s not necessarily 100% determined by either genes or by environmental factors.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/health...,3775839.story

My guess is that Nixon is saying that for her it is a choice to choose to live her life with a woman. Meaning, perhaps she is bisexual and can be satisfied having a relationship with either sex. Therefore, it IS a choice for her.

For me, I believe it is biological. I don't have any of the "environmental factors" that the right-wing, Freud, or some researcher somewhere says is the reason a person is gay.

My thoughts as well.

It seems very simple to me...
 

I have a hard time understanding why some people don't get it. Oftentimes it seems a person wants to project their own experiences onto everyone else or put everyone in boxes. You're Straight, you go in box 1. You are born Gay, you go in Box 2. Oh, I'm sorry there isn't a box 3, 4 or 5 or 100 or 1 Billion, you will have to fit into box 1 or 2. LoL. Discovery comes through many different experiences. My personal road doesn't define your path of discovery, and your path doesn't define mine.

For some of us we are born Gay and for others it's a choice whether it be Gay, Bi, Pan, or any other identity. I've known women who didn't discover that they were Gay until they were over 50 years old. I know other women who came out in their 30s, both Bi and Gay, and they had never thought about being with another woman before. That was a WOW moment the first time I met someone with this experience. I almost couldn't fathom it. But I accepted it. And I have met many many women and men with so many different stories of discoveries. So for me, not everyone is born Gay just because I was.

Yes, I was born Gay. But then, my story is still so much more complicated than that, (lol) because I believe in living a life or many lives before this one.

I like this too.

I don't get the uproar over what Cynthia Nixon said. If it's a choice for her, it's a choice. I think I was born being gay. She may think differently. I'm not even sure you would have to be bisexual necessarily to think it was a choice.

Thankfully not every gay person is exactly the same or thinks the same. However I actually do think saying it's genetic could potentially be used against us way more than saying it's a choice. I do think I was born this way. I just hope science doesn't get into the wrong hands.

Oh and I think Cynthia Nixon made a great choice. ;)

Yes, yes, a thousand times, yes! I agree, each path is as unique as the individual and yes, absolutely, people are born gay. In equal fashion, i've known people who's heterosexual experiences (in childhood, mainly, but also as adults) were simply so traumatic that same sex relationships were simply the right choice for them. No path is wrong, but I think it's narrow minded to believe it's one way or the other with no grey areas.

Thank you, Thank you ButchEire. :) I agree with you. I have also known those with this path too.

And I might also add... ok, I'm going to go ahead and add. Technically, there are those who may identify me as Straight. But please don't tell anyone. LoL. So, maybe I was born Straight. I don't know. I think it depends on who you ask.

I agree with what Cynthia Nixon said. Nobody would publish what I say because I am not a famous actress but I feel the same way. I have been attracted to butches from a very early age. I did not act on that attraction for many reasons. I made a conscious choice to come out a 42. I am out in every part of my life and I am very proud of that choice! I celebrate it every day. I don't consider myself bisexual. I am a queer lesbian.

I especially agree with her point about not letting the religious right wing define the terms of the discussion. No matter how we got here we are gay. That is what matters. I also agree with Belle about the issue of defining being gay through genes. Because it still puts the discussion in the realm of something that can be "cured" or changed. I don't care how I got this way and I do not want to change it.

Maybe she "thinks" she chose to be gay? She chose to be with men at one time and now women. I personally think that makes her Bisexual, she obviously loves both features of men and women.

I was born gay.... I know nothing else... was that a choice?

I also think there are people that were born Bi... Is that a choice? They choose who they will date... Maybe that is the CHOICE she is talking about?

I believe for some people it is a choice, the choice to live your life as you are or who you are!! "That is the Choice!"

**Disclaimer** I do NOT think being BI is a nasty dirty word (I have many friends that label themselves as Bi)

I like where she said (to paraphrase and make it something more like how i would say something) who gives a shit how I got here - I'm here.

And can we please all just stop calling her bisexual? She gets to choose how to describe herself.

My lesbianism is not biological in the sense that I've been physically attracted to all varieties of gender. Yet at the same time I would not say that being a lesbian was a choice for me.

I grew up in a home that was extremely patriarchal and misogynistic. I would get panic attacks listening at night to my father abuse my mother. And it went on and on, day in, day out. There was not a single moment when his goal was not to be as cruel as possible to her. And she took it, and we all took it, day in, day out. And it sent chills through me. Was this going to be my future?

In junior high school I had my first girlfriend. We fell deeply for each other, though we didn't call it "lesbian." Still, I had a moment of feeling like, "This is what life is about." It was broader than physical attraction. I felt like this was a type of love that rocked me to my core. Her parents and then my parents split us up, forbade us from seeing each other, and called us dykes. We had no idea what that meant and vehemently denied that we were anything bad or perverse.

Then in high school I found the book Radical Feminism, a 1970's anthology. I read that "Feminism is the theory. Lesbianism is the practice." I got into separatist literature and music and learned that "Any woman can be a lesbian." It was at that moment I KNEW I was a lesbian. It became a part of my blood, a political choice and yet it felt deeper than a choice and still does. I knew it would not be a phase, that this was IT, how I would live my life. I knew that I could never have a real romantic relationship with a biological man and would never want that, despite having a wonderful brother and male friends. I've always been happy and fulfilled living my life this way and still am. I couldn't/wouldn't change it for anything or anyone.

I am openly bisexual. I clearly do not think it is a dirty word - but I really do not like to hear people naming other people's sexuality for them.

I have some old school lesbian feminist friends who believe, like Ms. Nixon, that they made a choice to be gay. They were able to enjoy sex with men, but once their feminist consciousness was awakened in the 1970s, they couldn't bear to spend very much time with them because of their typically irritating behaviours. One of those couples has been together for more than 30 blissful yrs, and they have sex all the time. I don't think it would be wise for anyone to suggest to them that they aren't really lesbians. So, Pat Robertson was right. Feminism turned them into lesbians.

I was born this way. I'm a very sexual person, and I've forgotten more men than most women ever bed in a lifetime. That information surprises most people since I'm such a ferocious lesbian now. I didn't stop having sex with men until I was 21 or 22 yrs old. (I'm pushing 50 now.) I IDed as bisexual back then, and later as a lesbian.

We all come to our IDs in our own way and in our own time. I'm sure it would be far more convenient if we were all exactly alike, but we're not.